-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12.8k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
stabilize macro_lifetime_matcher #50385
Conversation
(rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
The job Click to expand the log.
I'm a bot! I can only do what humans tell me to, so if this was not helpful or you have suggestions for improvements, please ping or otherwise contact |
@@ -50,7 +50,6 @@ | |||
#![feature(from_ref)] | |||
#![feature(fs_read_write)] | |||
#![cfg_attr(windows, feature(libc))] | |||
#![feature(macro_lifetime_matcher)] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
You still need #![cfg_attr(stage0, feature(macro_lifetime_matcher))]
for these.
cc @rust-lang/docs -- what docs need updating for this? It's the stabilization of the lifetime matcher in macros. |
I sent a PR to the reference (and the book, but only the first edition has
this level of detail on macro_rules and I guess that's frozen now).
…On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 1:39 PM, Niko Matsakis ***@***.***> wrote:
cc @rust-lang/docs <https://github.com/orgs/rust-lang/teams/docs> -- what
docs need updating for this? It's the stabilization of the lifetime matcher
in macros.
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#50385 (comment)>, or mute
the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAC3nwaBgaZz2y1WGQVgSR_6UhNmpWK4ks5tue88gaJpZM4TuyeF>
.
|
✌️ @durka can now approve this pull request |
In the rust book maybe? |
See above comment.
…On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 6:06 PM, Guillaume Gomez ***@***.***> wrote:
In the rust book maybe?
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#50385 (comment)>, or mute
the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAC3nypEXF8ViE8iEyV3-D7xt78ifZRTks5tui3LgaJpZM4TuyeF>
.
|
@bors r- |
Yeah, probably, since I haven't gotten around to adding the macro_rules! m {
(T: $i:ident) => { true };
(T: $t:tt) => { false } // or $l:lifetime but it's not needed to see breakage from expanding :ident
}
m!(T: 'static) |
@petrochenkov that other thread is about the proc macro API. If you still want to merge ident and lifetime for macro_rules, can you explain the breaking change motivation? The impetus for :lifetime (like, years ago) was the fact that macro_rules can't tell lifetimes from tokens, so now talking about making them indistinguishable from idents, when this is finally implemented and on the cusp of being stabilized, feels like all the way back to square one. |
@durka
(I expected |
Oh I see, maybe I misunderstood. I thought you were proposing to merge them so BTW the idea of |
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #49835) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
1510bff
to
e857c1b
Compare
@petrochenkov so is this PR still blocked? |
I don't think so. |
📌 Commit e857c1b has been approved by |
stabilize macro_lifetime_matcher This stabilizes `:lifetime` which has completed FCP in #34303.
☀️ Test successful - status-appveyor, status-travis |
This stabilizes
:lifetime
which has completed FCP in #34303.